membership

[Ellen Kosmer]

Hi everybody,

Rachel (who is not in this Google group) sent the board an email that
suggested, what I think is a very good course of action at this point,
namely that we should have a moratorium on memberships until we have
thoroughly discussed the issue and have come to a consensus on the
direction and future direction of our organization. I do not believe
that our present situation warrants the level of anxiety that seems
present in reference to our getting as many members as we can as
quickly as we can.

I would like to add here, that I think the desire to obtain younger
members is misguided because I do not think that organizations like
ours have much appeal for younger people who prefer to Twitter or to
meet on Facebook. I think we need new members like ourselves
(yes ,with gray hair) who are congenial, committed individuals,
interested in the Amherst area and who are willing to give time and
energy to projects (like Love Notes) that will help social agencies
fulfill their missions. As important as our charitable endeavors are I
think we should not lose sight of the benefits of congenial, social
engagement that our weekly lunches provide.

Ellen Kosmer

[Hubbard Smith]

I agree with Ellen's thoughts on membership and of our not being much of a magnet for the younger folks, and unless I'm overlooking something, I don't see the need for a moratorium--if we have a live and energetic prospect with gray hair (or possibly just gray roots), let's grab her or him!   ---Hub

---

From: future-of-the...@googlegroups.com on behalf of Ellen Kosmer
Sent: Sat 10/24/2009 3:45 PM
To: future-of-the...@googlegroups.com
Cc: Rachel Mustin
Subject: membership

[Lorraine Desrosiers]

I respect Ellen's comments as well as Rachel's about a moratorium, and especially as Ellen is chair of the Membership Committee.  Having clarity there that includes direction from the club as a whole would be useful.  I'm not sure we need a moratorium until that clarity prevails, but of course am eager to hear what everyone else has to say about it.

 

And I agree that a profile for new members need not be different from present members with respect to age.  As for other characteristics, we have to figure out what will, spelled out on an application form, best correspond to the kind of participation that we want.

 

Lorraine

[Michael Greenebaum]

I see no reason for a moratorium, We have a prevailing process and
set of criteria and until that changes it seems to serve us well
enough. If we change in the direction of application and away from
invitation there is no reason why we should stop inviting people until
that happens; we need new members. And while I would love to see
younger members, that doesn't mean not having new prime timers like
ourselves.

The purpose of this group is to discuss potential future directions,
and it would seem ironic if we froze the present in order to have that
discussion.

Michael

[Lorraine Desrosiers]

Yes, Michael, that sort of says it, a moratorium does freeze things and we
do have guidelines in place -- if only each of us understood them in the
same way, not always possible in any case. It's a review of those
guidelines that we need, one that addresses all the concerns about
membership that we have been discussing, and then some.